Audios #1 and #2 of Saturday cross-examination
9:30 Saturday morning, June 13, 2009
[Discussion between lawyers, in particular advice to avoid repeating questions
already posed. Background noise and admonitions of "shhh". Also lengthy
discussion of the presence of television cameras, photographers. Final
conclusion: they still have to stay out except for some minutes at the
beginning and/or end.]
9:40 [A lot of background noise, talking in the public.] If the public could
politely cease the noise and comments...yes...we could begin the audience.
[He recalls: trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, all the names
of lawyers involved, defense and prosecution, "parti civili".]
He invites Amanda to state her identity again, which she does.
The interrogation is by the "pubblico ministero" [Mignini].
All right, Miss Knox, can you tell us about when you first met Raffaele
It was at a concert at the Universita per Stranieri, I think it was on Oct 25.
So I've understood [odd remark: meaning "so I've been told?"]
So it was just about a week before the facts, more or less. Now, on the
afternoon and evening of Oct 31, can you tell us what you did?
In the evening?
Afternoon and evening.
So, in the afternoon, I remember that I met a friend for coffee, my friend
Spiros. We had coffee in the center, and then in the street when I was going
back to meet Raffaele, I was still with him and I met someone I had gotten to
know at "Le Chic", who said "We'll see each other later at Le Chic"...
You said "We'll see each other later?"
To whom? To Raffaele's friend?
No, no. It was my friend, that I had gotten to know in a bar, a cafe that
also had internet service, and then, okay. What happened next? [Long
pause with sound 'ummmmm', 'hmmm'.] Did I go home? I can't remember.
You can't remember.
And then, for Halloween, I know I went to Le Chic first, and then after I was
there for a little while, I again met Spiros, outside the Merlin, and we went
to a place with a bunch of his friends, I can't remember what place it was
now, a kind of Irish pub, and then he...I said I was tired and wanted to
meet Raffaele in the center, and so he accompanied me on foot to near the
church, where I met Raffaele, who took me to his apartment.
Now. [I'm using "Now" today to translate "Senta" which really means "Listen",
but starting a question with "Listen" in English makes it sound kind of
aggressive, which for now Mignini's voice is not. Rather, quiet and very
poised.] Have you ever made use of drugs? In particular on the afternoon
or the evening of Nov 1?
I did smoke a joint with Raffaele in the evening, yes.
So you do confirm this detail.
So now we get to Patrick's message.
So, Patrick's message came, I believe you said, at 8:15.
More or less. What did it say exactly?
I don't remember the exact words...
[Interrupts] Was it in Italian? Was it in Italian?
Yes, it was in Italian. It had to do with the fact that there wasn't anyone
at Le Chic so I didn't need to go to work.
And you saw this message at around what time?
Uh, I don't remember the time.
But was it after a little while or right away?
I was on Raffaele's bed and then I noticed that there was this symbol on my
But you don't remember when?
No. I don't look at the clock.
And you answered Patrick -- how did you answer?
Well, I wrote something like "Okay, see you later ["ci vediamo piu -- um --
tardi"], buona serata.
You answered in which language?
In Italian. He didn't speak English.
"Ci vediamo piu tardi", you said.
Which in English means "See you" --
Yes but, excuse me, but you answered in Italian.
"Ci vediamo piu tardi."
He doesn't speak English.
Very well. It follows that your cell phone [gives number] and Sollecito's
[gives number] stopped their activity respectively, yours at 8:35 and
his at 8:42. Why?
I turned mine off, because I didn't want to get another message from Patrick,
because actually I didn't really want to go to work. For example, he
had told me that I didn't have to work, but if then a bunch of people showed
up, well honestly, he had told me I didn't have to go to work and I wanted
to stay with Raffaele.
Yesterday if I'm not mistaken, you said that you did it to stay with
On page 40 (I don't know if it corresponds) of the minutes of your interrogation
of December 17, you said, I'll read it, that: "I turned off my phone to
save my battery." Do you remember that?
Well, if it's written there, it must be okay.
Today you're saying one thing, in the interrogation you said another. [Voice
intervenes: can you be more precise about the page?] Page 40: I'll read it.
"But why did you turn off your phone?" Interrogation of Dec 17. "To save
my battery." "Do you usually keep it on at night?" [Voices arguing, a bit
annoyed, they can't find it in the text?] Well, bottom of page 39, but these
were the words. Knox's answer: "To save my battery." "Do you usually keep
it on at night?" "If I have something to do the next morning." "But the
next morning was the day on which everyone skipped school." "But we were
supposed to go to Gubbio the next day with Raffaele." The next day was the
You wanted to go to Gubbio on the 2nd or the 3rd?
No, on the 2nd we wanted to go to Gubbio.
So, you turned off your telephone so Patrick wouldn't be able to call you in
to work, or you turned it off to save your battery, not to use up your
battery. Now, you remember what, what battery you had? what kind of autonomy
What kind of battery?
I don't know what type of battery it was, but...
The autonomy of the battery? Do you remember?
I think it was about one or two days. It wasn't very long, but in the end,
well, for example, the next morning, I was going to go to Gubbio, but
I didn't have time to charge up the battery, so I thought, I don't want to
get any phone calls this evening, and if I want to have my phone with me
in Gubbio, I wanted it to be reasonably charged up. That's why I turned it off.
I see. Now -- are we hearing something from the "contestazione"?
[Voices arguing] In fact, yesterday Amanda Knox stated that turning off the
cell phone was to guarantee her a free evening without being...[interruption]
But at the interrogation of Dec 17 she said...On Dec 17 she said it was
to save battery and also for this reason [different voices, can't
tell who is saying what, but I think this is Ghirga. Also they are
interrupting each other]. So, I thought I understood that she had two
reasons. We're not arguing about that. The "contestazione" isn't about that. It's about... Please, please, let's return to the cross-examination by the
pubblico ministero. The defense lawyers will have the final words. Everyone
will hear what they have to say then.
The objection was because the request to introduce...[A bit more yelling.]
Enough now ["adesso basta"].
[I think this is Ghirga] My objection concerned the fact that the pubblico
ministero seemed to contest the fact that in the Dec 17 interrogation, she
also explained that she turned off her phone because she didn't want to be
called by Patrick, because she didn't want to be disturbed. This doesn't
correspond to the truth, because on page 40 of the minutes, she actually
says "So, I turned it off also to not run the risk that Patrick would
change his mind and call me in." [Interruption] "To save her battery!"
"All right, we heard the pubblico ministero...we heard him describe a reason,
two reasons, if there's a contradiction, there will be an analysis. It's
not only half a contradiction, or not a contradiction." [different voices]
Now let's leave this question...please, pubblico ministero. Go ahead. [I'm
using this expression to translate "prego".]
Why? erm-ahem -- why did you return to this point several times?
Why did you speak about Patrick only in the interrogation of Nov 6 at 1:45?
Why didn't you mention him before? You never mentioned him before.
In your preceding declarations, on Nov 2 at 15:30, on Nov 3 at 14:45, then,
there was another one, Nov 4, 14:45, and then there's Nov 6, 1:45. Only
in these declarations, and then in the following spontaneous declarations,
did you mention the name of Patrick. Why hadn't you ever mentioned him before?
Because that was the one where they suggested Patrick's name to me.
All right, now is the time for you to make this precise and specific. At
this point I will take...no, I'll come back to it later. You need to
explain this. You have stated: "The name of Patrick was suggested to me.
I was hit, pressured."
Now you have to tell me in a completely detailed way, you have to remember
for real, you have to explain step by step, who, how, when, was the name of
Patrick suggested to you, and what had been done before that point, when
the name of Patrick hadn't yet come up like a mushroom; in the preceding
situation. Who put pressure on you, what do you mean by the word "pressure",
who hit you. You said: "They hit me", and at the request of the lawyer
Ghirga, yesterday, you described two little blows, two cuffs.
So that would be what you meant by being hit?
Or something else? Tell me if there was something else. You can tell us.
[Interruption by Ghirga, to explain, I guess to Amanda, that the pubblico
ministero is coming back to the same terrain covered yesterday, in order to
give her the chance to add detail.]
All right [Amanda says]. Okay.
If you could give more detail, be more precise, exactly what was suggested to
you, about the cuffs, all that.
And who did all this, if you can.
Okay. Fine. So, when I got to the Questura, they placed me to the side, near
the elevator, where I was waiting for Raffaele. I had taken my homework, and
was starting to do my homework, but a policeman came in, in fact there were
I don't know, three of them or something, and they wanted to go on talking to
me. They asked me again --
Excuse me, excuse me --
-- to tell them --
Excuse me for interrupting you otherwise we'll forget --
[Ghirga] I object to this interruption! The question was asked...[Yelling,
interruptions, "It's impossible to question someone this way! There's a
rule that says one should avoid any interruptions. She has the right to
finish her answer. It's not possible to go on like this, no, no, no..."
interrupting...Mignini starts "I can" -- Ghirga: "no, nobody can! We have
to make sure that when someone is speaking, there's no superimposing of
voices. And since the accused is undergoing examination, she has the right
to be allowed to answer in the calmest possible way. Interruptions and
talking at the same time don't help, and they can't be written down in the
minutes, which obliges the courts to suspend the audience and start it again
at a calmer and more tranquil moment." Mignini starts again: "Presidente..."
Ghirga: "No, no, no! Interruptions are not allowed! The accused is
allowed to answer without interruption, and then when she's done, you can go
back and ask questions" -- interruption -- "please! While she's speaking,
everyone is requested to see that she is not interrupted. During her
exposition one could ask "When?" for instance if she is saying
"I was doing homework" -- Amanda: "Okay". Ghirga: "If you say precise dates
and times, they won't need to come back over your testimony." "Okay."
"In your exposition, be more detailed about the time and the date."
Okay. Um --
[Ghirga:] So everyone is asked to avoid interruptions while she is speaking,
and when she's finished, we can go over what she said. Go ahead.
Thank you. So, here is...how I understood the question, I'm answering about
what happened to me on the night of the 5th and the morning of the 6th of
November 2007, and when we got to the Questura, I think it was around
10:30 or nearer 11, but I'm sorry, I don't know the times very precisely,
above all during that interrogation. [End of Audio #1, starting Audio #2.]
The more the confusion grew, the more I lost the sense of time. But I
didn't do my homework for a very long time. I was probably just reading the
first paragraph of what I had to read, when these policemen came to sit
near me, to ask me to help them by telling them who had ever entered in
our house. So I told them, okay, well there was this girlfriend of mine and
they said no no no, they only wanted to know about men. So I said okay,
here are the names of the people I know, but really I don't know, and they
said, names of anyone you saw nearby, so I said, there are some people that
are friends of the boys, or of the girls, whom I don't know very well,
and it went on like this, I kept on answering these questions, and finally
at one point, while I was talking to them, they said "Okay, we'll take
you into this other room." So I said okay and went with them, and they started
asking me to talk about what I had been doing that evening. At least, they
kept asking about the last time I saw Meredith, and then about everything
that happened the next morning, and we had to repeat again and again everything
about what I did. Okay, so I told them, but they always kept wanting times
and schedules, and time segments: "what did you do between 7 and 8?" "And
from 8 to 9? And from 9 to 10?" I said look, I can't be this precise, I
can tell you the flow of events, I played the guitar, I went to the house,
I looked at my e-mails, I read a book, and I was going on like this.
There were a lot people coming in and going out all the time, and there was
one policeman always in front of me, who kept going on about this. Then at
one point an interpreter arrived, and the interpreter kept on telling me,
try to remember the times, try to remember the times, times, times, times,
and I kept saying "I don't know. I remember the movie, I remember the dinner,
I remember what I ate," and she kept saying "How can you you remember this
thing but not that thing?" or "How can you not remember how you were dressed?"
because I was thinking, I had jeans, but were they dark or light, I just
can't remember. And then she said "Well, someone is telling us that you were
not at Raffaele's house. Raffaele is saying that at these times you were not
home." And I said, but what is he saying, that I wasn't there? I was there!
Maybe I can't say exactly what I was doing every second, every minute, because
I didn't look at the time. I know that I saw the movie, I ate dinner. And
she would say "No no no, you saw the film at this time, and then after that
time you went out of the house. You ate dinner with Raffaele, and then there
is this time where you did nothing, and this time where you were out of the
house. And I said, no, that's not how it was. I was always in Raffaele's
[Ghirga, after his long discussion about interruptions above, actually
takes advantage of a tiny pause here to slip in: "Excuse me, excuse me, the
pubblico ministero wants to hear precise details about the suggestions about
what to say and the cuffs, who gave them to you."]
All right. What it was was a continuous crescendo of these discussions and
arguments, because while I was discussing with them, in the end they started
to little by little and then more and more these remarks about "We're not
convinced by you, because you seem to be able to remember one thing but not
remember another thing. We don't understand how you could take a shower
without seeing..." And then, they kept on asking me "Are you sure of what
you're saying? Are you sure? Are you sure? If you're not sure, we'll take
you in front of a judge, and you'll go to prison, if you're not telling the
truth." Then they told me this thing about how Raffaele was saying that
I had gone out of the house. I said look, it's impossible. I don't know if
he's really saying that or not, but look, I didn't go out of the house.
And they said "No, you're telling a lie. You'd better remember what you did
for real, because otherwise you're going to prison for 30 years because you're
a liar." I said no, I'm not a liar. And they said "Are you sure you're not
protecting someone?" I said no, I'm not protecting anyone. And they said
"We're sure you're protecting someone." Who, who, who, who did you meet when
you went out of Raffaele's house?" I didn't go out. "Yes, you did go out.
Who were you with?" I don't know. I didn't do anything. "Why didn't you
go to work?" Because my boss told me I didn't have to go to work. "Let's see
your telephone to see if you have that message." Sure, take it. "All right,
So one policeman took it, and started looking in it, while the others kept
on yelling "We know you met someone, somehow, but why did you meet someone?"
But I kept saying no, no, I didn't go out, I'm not pro-pro-pro---
[Ghirga again I think, slipping into a tiny hole created by her stammering
over the word "protecting" -- interestingly by the way, she stammered badly
over pronouncing this word earlier as well -- an Eyes for Lies red flag??]
Excuse me, okay, we understand that there was a continuous crescendo.
As you said earlier. But if we could now get to the questions of the pubblico
ministero, otherwise it will really be impossible to avoid some interruptions.
If you want to be able to continue as tranquilly, as continuously as possible...
Okay, I'm sorry.
So, if you could get to the questions about exactly when, exactly who...these
suggestions, exactly what did they consist in? It seems to me...
Okay. Fine. So, they had my telephone, and at one point they said "Okay,
we have this message that you sent to Patrick", and I said I don't think I did,
and they yelled "Liar! Look! This is your telephone, and here's your
message saying you wanted to meet him!" And I didn't even remember that I
had written him a message. But okay, I must have done it. And they were saying
that the message said I wanted to meet him. That was one thing. Then there
was the fact that there was this interpreter next to me, and she was telling
me "Okay, either you are an incredibly stupid liar, or you're not able to
remember anything you've done." So I said, how could that be? And she said,
"Maybe you saw something so tragic, so terrible that you can't remember it.
Because I had a terrible accident once where I broke my leg..."
The interpreter said this to you?
I also wanted to ask you because it isn't clear to me: only the interpreter
spoke to you, or the others also?
All the others also.
Everyone was talking to you, all the others, but were they speaking in English?
No, in Italian.
In Italian. And you answered in Italian?
In Italian, in English...
And what was said to you in Italian, did it get translated to you in English?
A bit yes, a bit no, there was so much confusion, there were so many people
all talking at the same time, one saying "Maybe it was like this, maybe
you don't remember," another saying "No, she's a stupid liar," like that...
But everything was eventually translated, or you understood some of it and
answered right away?
It wasn't like an interrogation, like what we're doing now, where one person
asks me a question and I answer. No. There were so many people talking,
asking, waiting, and I answered a bit here and there.
All right. You were telling us that the interpreter was telling you about
something that had happened to her. [Interruption: Ghirga: This isn't
a spontaneous declaration now. This is an examination. That means the
pubblico ministero has asked you a question, always the same question, and
we still haven't really heard the answer to it.]
Right, so you were saying that there was this continuous crescendo.
It's difficult for me to say that one specific person said one specific thing.
It was the fact that there were all these little suggestions, and someone
was saying that there was the telephone, then there was the fact that...
then more than anything what made me try to imagine something was someone
saying to me "Maybe you're confused, maybe you're confused and you should
try to remember something different. Try to find these memories that
obviously you have somehow lost. You have to try to remember them. So I
was there thinking, but what could I have forgotten? And I was thinking,
what have I forgotten? what have I forgotten? and they were shouting
"Come on, come on, come on, remember, remember, remember," and boom! on
my head. "Remember!" And I was like -- Mamma Mia! and then boom!
Excuse me, excuse me, please, excuse me...
Those were the cuffs.
[Voices: "This is impossible!" "Avoid thinking aloud!"]
[Ghirga:] So, the pubblico ministero asked you, and is still asking you,
who is the person that gave you these two blows that you just showed us
with a gesture?
It was a policewoman, but I didn't know their names.
Go ahead, pubblico ministero.
So, now, I asked you a question, and I did not get an answer. You ...
[interruptions! Ghirga: "I object to that remark! That is a personal
evaluation! Presidente! That is very suggestive. He is making an unacceptable
conclusion. He asked a question, but this is a personal opinion. It
seems to me that she did answer. She answered for a good five minutes."
"Sorry, but I thought we were supposed to avoid interruptions, that we weren't
supposed to interrupt when someone was speaking--" "But--" "Wait -- excuse
me, please, let's try to avoid these moments which don't help anybody and
probably harm the person undergoing the examination because they create
tension in the court--" Now Ghirga and Mignini are speaking at the same time
for quite a little moment -- Ghirga's voice is louder -- "Let's take the
answers as they come, later the right moment will come to say that from
this examination, you did not obtain the answer that you expected, that the
accused did not answer the questions. That is a later phase. At this
moment, let's stay with the answers that we have, even if they are not
exhaustive, and avoiding personal evaluations of their value. Go ahead,
publicco ministero, go ahead." "I would like to--" "Yes, yes, go ahead,
return to your question."]
The central point of that interrogation was the moment when the name of
Patrick emerged. You spoke of suggestions, you spoke of pressure, you spoke
of being hit, I asked you to give me a precise description of who gave
you the blows, you need to describe this person. Was it a woman or a man?
Who asked you the questions? Who was asking you the questions? There
was the interpreter, who was the person who was translating. But the exam,
the interrogation, who was doing it? Apart from the people who were going
in and out. You must have understood that there was a murder, and this
was a police station, and the investigation was hot, and what I am asking
you is, who was actually conducting the interrogation?
[Ghirga? not sure, softer voice. "The pubblico ministero is asking you,
you said that the two blows were given to me by someone whose name I don't
know. The pubblico ministero is asking you firstly if you can give a
description of the person who hit you, if you saw her, and if you can
give us a description. The second question --"]
So, when I -- the person who was conducting the interrogation --
That was the second question! You're starting with the second question,
that's fine, go ahead, go ahead.
Go on, go on. The person who was conducting the interrogation...
Well, there were lots and lots of people who were asking me questions, but
the person who had started talking with me was a policewoman with long
hair, chestnut brown hair, but I don't know her. Then in the circle of
people who were around me, certain people asked me questions, for example
there was a man who was holding my telephone, and who was literally
shoving the telephone into my face, shouting "Look at this telephone!
Who is this? Who did you want to meet?" Then there were others, for instance
this woman who was leading, was the same person who at one point was
standing behind me, because they kept moving, they were really surrounding
me and on top of me. I was on a chair, then the interpreter was also sitting
on a chair, and everyone else was standing around me, so I didn't see
who gave me the first blow because it was someone behind me, but then I
turned around and saw that woman, and she gave me another blow to the head.
This was the same woman with the long hair?
Yes, the same one.
All right. Are you finished? Tell me if you have something to add.
Well, I already answered.
Fine, fine, all right. So I'll go on with the questions. In the minutes
it mentions three people, plus the interpreter. Now, you first said
that they suggested things to you. What exactly do you mean by the word
"suggestion", because from your description, I don't see any suggestion.
I mean, what is meant by the Italian word "suggerimento", I don't find it.
[Ghirga: "Excuse me, excuse me, please, please, excuse me, excuse me! Listen,
the pubblico ministero is asking you: "suggestions", you also mentioned
words that were "put in your mouth", versions, things to say, circumstances
to describe. The pubblico ministero is asking two things: who made the
suggestions, and what exactly were you told to say?]
All right. It seems to me that the thoughts of the people standing around me,
there were so many people, and they suggested things to me in the sense that
they would ask questions like: "Okay, you met someone!" No, I didn't.
They would say "Yes you did, because we have this telephone here, that
says that you wanted to meet someone. You wanted to meet him." No, I don't
remember that. "Well, you'd better remember, because if not we'll put
you in prison for 30 years." But I don't remember! "Maybe it was him that
you met? Or him? You can't remember?" It was this kind of suggestion.
When you say they said "Maybe you met him?", did they specify names? Well,
the important fact was this message to Patrick, they were very excited about
it. So they wanted to know if I had received a message from him --
Please, please! [Interruptions, multiple yelling: "It's not possible to go
on this way!" "Please, please, excuse me, excuse me!" "I'm going to ask
to suspend the audience! I demand a suspension of five minutes!"
"Excuse me, excuse me!" "Please!" "Viva Dio, Presidente!" "Presidente,
I'm trying to do a cross-examination, and I must have the conditions that
allow me to do it! The defense keeps interrupting." "Excuse me, excuse me,
please--" "We're asking for a suspension!" "Presidente, you've heard all
the demands, please decide." "Please--" "Pubblico ministero, please wait!"
Several moments of silence, during which Amanda murmurs in a very tiny
voice: "Scusa." "I want to point out that the accused offers answers to
every question. She could always refuse to respond. She is answering, and
that doesn't mean she has to be asked about the same circumstances again
and again. She is not a witness. The accused goes under different rules.
We have to give the answers--" "But--" "Please, please! We have to accept
the answers given by the accused. She can stop answering at any time.
At some point we simply have to move on to different questions. One
circumstance is being asked again, the accused answered. The rituality
of the court, of the process, has to be respected. The pubblico ministero
was asking about suggestions. [To Amanda] If you want a suspension we
can do it right away." "No, I'm fine." So the pubblico ministero was asking
about the suggestions. All right?" "Sure."]
So, were you the one who gave the first indication, who first introduced
this name "Patrick"?
It was because of the fact that they were saying that I apparently had
met someone and they said this because of the message, and they were saying
"Are you sure you don't remember meeting THIS person, because you wrote
In this message, was there the name of the person it was meant for?
No, it was the message I wrote to my boss. The one that said "Va bene.
Ci vediamo piu tardi. Buona serata."
But it could have been a message to anyone. Could you see from the message
to whom it was written?
Actually, I don't know if that information is in the telephone. But I told
them that I had received a message from Patrick, and they looked for it in
the telephone, but they couldn't find it, but they found the one I sent to
[Someone else] I also wanted to ask you for the pubblico ministero, you wrote
this message in Italian. I wanted to ask you, since you are an English
speaker, what do you do when you wrote in Italian? Do you first think in
English, and then translate into Italian, or do you manage to think
directly in Italian?
No, at that time, I first thought in English, then I would translate, and
So that clarifies that phrase. Go ahead, pubblico ministero, but I think
we've exhausted the question.
Yes, yes. I just wanted one concept to be clear: that in the Italian language,
"suggerire" means "indicate", someone who "suggests" a name actually says
the name and the other person adopts it. That is what "suggerimento" is,
and I...so my question is, did the police first pronounce the name of Patrick,
or was it you? And was it pronounced after having seen the message in the
phone, or just like that, before that message was seen?
Objection! Objection! On page 95, I read--
Before the objection, what was the question?
The question was: the question that was objected was about the term
"suggerimento". Because I interpret that word this way: the police say
"Was it Patrick?" and she confirms that it was Patrick. This is suggestion
in the Italian language.
Excuse me, please, excuse me. Let's return to the accused. What was the
suggestion, because I thought I had understood that the suggestion consisted
in the fact that Patrick Lumumba, to whom the message was addressed, had
been identified, they talked about "him, him, him". In what terms exactly
did they talk about this "him"? What did they say to you?
So, there was this thing that they wanted a name. And the message --
You mean, they wanted a name relative to something.
Of the person I had written to, precisely. And they told me that I knew,
and that I didn't want to tell. And that I didn't want to tell because I
didn't remember or because I was a stupid liar. Then they kept on about
this message, that they were literally shoving in my face saying "Look
what a stupid liar you are, you don't even remember this!" At first, I
didn't even remember writing that message. But there was this interpreter
next to me who kept saying "Maybe you don't remember, maybe you don't
remember, but try," and other people were saying "Try, try, try to remember
that you met someone, and I was there hearing "Remember, remember, remember,"
and then there was this person behind me who -- it's not that she actually
really physically hurt me, but she frightened me...
"Remember!" is not a suggestion. It is a strong solicitation of your memory.
But it was always "Remember" following this same idea, that...
But they didn't literally say that it was him!
No. They didn't say it was him, but they said "We know who it is, we know
who it is. You were with him, you met him."
So, these were the suggestions.
Pubblico ministero, I object here on the dynamics, because...[arguing]
I contest it because in the minutes of the Dec 17 interrogation, page 95,
you say: The police could not have suggested-- [Tremendous arguing and
yelling, some saying that they need to know the exact page, it's different
in their version, others that the pubblico ministero should not be
interrupted, others that the reading should not be interrupted...]
End of Audio #2